Romance languages and switching to English

[rdearman]

based on my anecdotal evidence with dozens and dozens of people, the French native ones tend to do this more often than the Spanish ones

Well, my experience is broadly similar but probably not as much anecdotal evidence as you. The French do tend to do this more than the Italians I encountered. In fact, this was part of the discussion I was having with the French lady today, about French people switching. She felt it was just because they don't expect non-French speakers to cope well in French, and the accent gives us away.

[Cavesa]

... And when it comes to ESL, there is both the carrot and the stick. And the stick is pretty huge these days...

There is no stick, you are simply deprived of the carrot, surely you recognize the difference.

No, this is not exact. In a world, where English is demanded even for jobs, where it isn't needed, there is a stick. In a world, where some HR workers even admit that English on the CV works as a simple to the trash/on the table distinction, if the pile of applications is too high, there is a huge stick. If you are otherwise good at a job and know a different huge language useful at the work in question and are out of luck due to English, that is a stick.

If you get shout at for being bad at English as a kid and preferring a different language, that is a stick. If you get ridiculed for such a preference both by children and adults, that is a stick. If the school system prefers English too much despite the reality in the region, there are sticks for everyone in the population

No. As someone with actual experience with being an English learner, I cannot agree. No offence meant, but your idea of what it is like to learn English and the implications of it in the real life is extremely naive and actually proves my point. You seem to automatically assume that people are learning English only thanks to positive motivation. It is not so.

It is for the romance languages, despite the fact the carrot is so much smaller. If you look at the reasons of people you meat in the real life, on this forum, on other internet platforms, the stick reasons are much rarer.

Who knows, perhaps my original assumption was wrong. Perhaps the carrots don't need to be so much more visible. Perhaps there need to be bigger sticks, but those cannot be invented from the bottom, there would need to be a bigger movement in business or the EU.

[Speakeasy]

... And when it comes to ESL, there is both the carrot and the stick. And the stick is pretty huge these days...

There is no stick, you are simply deprived of the carrot, surely you recognize the difference.

No, this is not exact. In a world, where English is demanded even for jobs, where it isn't needed, there is a stick... .

In the history of the development of lingua francas, the operating inducement to adopt them has been the procurement of some advantage. Economic advantage was the inducement to learn English and it reamains the only inducement. This is a carrot, it is not a stick.

In some rare instances, coercion has been used as an operating inducement; for example, the arrival of armoured divisions. This is a stick. The only advantage procured is the avoidance of severe punishment. Once the coercion ceases, many peoples reject the language that was imposed upon them, as there is no real inducement to continue.

Cavesa, given the history of your country during the 20th century, I am absolutely astonished that you should conflate the economic inducement to learn one languge with the political requirement to learn another.

PS: The above is not a political discussion, it is a commentary on how lingua franca develop and the inducements to adopt them.

[rdearman]

This threads topic is: Romance languages and switching to English

[aaleks]

The Americans were not required to make even the slightest effort at coercing the locals into learning English. "You don’t want to serve me in my language? That’s fine, I’ll find someone who does!"

It’s like raising a child, you don’t have to use corporal punishment, you need only demonstrate to them that there are consequences for failing to conform to your wishes.

I'm sorry, really, but that reminded me of the anecdote:

A cat caught a mouse and asked it "How do you prefer to be eaten? With sour cream or vinegar?"

[Speakeasy]

I'm sorry, really, but that reminded me of the anecdote: A cat caught a mouse and asked it "How do you prefer to be eaten? With sour cream or vinegar?"

A very weak metaphor. In the case of the Americans it was more a matter of the cat saying to the mouse: "Do you want to eat at my table? Fine, learn to speak my language!" The mice joined the cat at the table, they enjoyed their meal, they continued to speak mousey-talk amongst themselves, they were not eaten and, when the waiter presented the bill, it turned out to be nothing more than the requirement to learn a new language. I recall that "carrots" were on the menu, not sticks.

[Cavesa]

In the history of the development of lingua francas, the operating inducement to adopt them has been the procurement of some advantage. Economic advantage was the inducement to learn English and it reamains the only inducement. This is a carrot, it is not a stick.

In some rare instances, coercion has been used as an operating inducement; for example, the arrival of armoured divisions. This is a stick. The only advantage procured is the avoidance of severe punishment. Once the coercion ceases, many peoples reject the language that was imposed upon them, as there is no real inducement to continue.

Cavesa, given the history of your country during the 20th century, I am absolutely astonished that you should conflate the economic inducement to learn one languge with the political requirement to learn another.

PS: The above is not a political discussion, it is a commentary on how lingua franca develop and the inducements to adopt them.

No, I think you don't understand the simple thing that the carrot became the stick. Twenty or perhaps even ten years ago, it was the carrot. You learnt English, you got a better paying job. Now, English has become the expected standard. You don't learn English, you get a horrible job with low pay. That is the stick.

Economic punishment is a huge stick. It is similar to university degrees. Those used to be the pathway to above average income, there was the carrot. Nowadays, they are so common that not having any comes with the stick-jobs with well bellow average salary. That is the stick. I am not continuing the degree I hate because of some carrot, there is actually none at the end of this degree. But if I end without finishing, the more considering my age, I will be at a huge disadvantage for the rest of my life, even when compared with people who went for hypereasy paid degrees. That is the stick. It is the same thing as with English or another skill that used to be exclusive and now became the standard.

Given the history of my country during the 20th century, I can assure you many people in this country see little difference in what language is being imposed on them. While you and I make a clear distinction between the language of occupants and language of economy, it is extremely common to hear "we just exchanged Russian for English". This is a real quote. For many people, there is little difference in what reasons are making the schools force a particular language on them. It is sad, it reflects on a part of this nation being very stupid, but it is the reality.

I agree this is not a political discussion. It is about the huge differences between the romance language natives' and English language natives' perception of learners. The natives of romance languages simply resigned on using the stick completely, and grow their carrots hidden in their garden, instead of showing them in a store with lots of advertisements.

[aaleks]

I'm sorry, really, but that reminded me of the anecdote: A cat caught a mouse and asked it "How do you prefer to be eaten? With sour cream or vinegar?"

A very weak metaphor. In the case of the Americans it was more a matter of the cat saying to the mouse: "Do you want to eat at my table? Fine, learn to speak my language!" The mice joined the cat at the table, they enjoyed their meal, they continued to speak mousey-talk amongst themselves, they were not eaten and, when the waiter presented the bill, it turned out to be nothing more than the requirement to learn a new language. I recall that "carrots" were on the menu, not sticks.

I don't want to arguing so I'll just say that I have been studying English only because I've wanted to. In my case there are no carrots, no sticks.

[anamsc]

I have quite a bit of experience with these topics, so I thought I'd add my personal anecdotal experience to the discussion. For the record, I used to live in France and also spent several years living on the border of France and different countries, during which time I visited France regularly and had various levels of proficiency in French. I am also a woman and was in my 20s for most of my time in France.

My level of French is worse than my level of Spanish was when I first arrived in Spain, but I noticed no more switching in France than in Spain. In fact, in Spain I would get into conversations with people, mention I was from the US halfway through, and have those people start trying to speak English with me. (This used to annoy me quite a bit, but after observing other people -- including native bilinguals -- handle this situation I know now that I can just say a few phrases in English and then switch back.)

For example, I was just in a very touristy area in France on holiday, with three people who spoke 1) no French, 2) only the basics, and 3) 1-2 semesters college French. My French has deteriorated a bit recently, so I tried to be conscious of the fact that people might have better English than my French -- I spoke to people in French but gave them opportunities to switch if they wanted. By and large, almost nobody switched to French with me. What's more, people tended to either talk to my companions in slow French / a mix of English and French or address me in French and wait for me to translate. This was, again, in a very touristy area where people seemed to be able to speak English.

I also strongly disagree with the idea that French people within France have an attitude of "why would anyone want to learn French." That is not my experience at all. If anything, I think French people are used to speaking with foreigners who achieve a high level in their language, since there is French-medium education all over the world and French is still often seen as a prestige language. It's nice to speak French in France compared to, say, Catalan in Catalonia or German in Germany (basing this solely on my experience), because people realize you're foreign but take it totally in stride.

My strategy overall is to try to speak the local language of the country I'm in whenever possible (unless there are extenuating circumstances). I do this here in the UK as well; I always speak English at first. This sometimes annoys, for example, Spanish speakers, who make an effort to speak to me in English when they could have just spoken Spanish, but I think people like us, who want to practice the language or just fit in, appreciate it. (I admit, though, that when I meet a Catalan speaker I do say a sentence or two in Catalan before switching back to English, just because it seems to make Catalans so happy to hear a foreigner speak their language.)

Also, I don't think most Americans (the ones who don't live in Europe) really expect people to speak English. We don't visit foreign countries very often, and plenty of immigrants in the US don't speak any English. If an average American goes to a foreign country and speaks to someone in English, I think it's because they don't speak anything else, and some words are better than nothing if you want to get your point across. Of course, they're often pleasantly surprised with the level of English spoken in touristy places throughout Europe.

[Speakeasy]

No, I think you don't understand the simple thing that the carrot became the stick. Twenty or perhaps even ten years ago, it was the carrot. You learnt English, you got a better paying job. Now, English has become the expected standard. You don't learn English, you get a horrible job with low pay. That is the stick. Economic punishment is a huge stick. It is similar to university degrees...

Cavesa, it seems to me that you are confusing the notions of reward and punishment.

Broadly speaking, rewards are accorded in recognition of performance against certain criteria. This is the “carrot” approach to encouraging good behaviour, as judged by those who govern a given system. The person or organisation having the power to set the goals to be achieved, the standards of performance, and the means of distributing the awards, is obviously in an advantageous position with respect to anyone seeking the proffered rewards. However, in a system of "rewards for performance", there is no coercion involved. Individuals are free to decide whether they wish to participate the process and, in so doing, to attempt to measure up to the standards and thereby receive the rewards. They are also free to decide to not participate in the process and thereby forego the opportunity of receiving a reward. Whether rewards are distributed for learning a lingua franca or for proving one’s professional competence in medicine or any other field of human endeavour, the “gate keepers” set the standards and either distribute or withhold the associate rewards. The withholding of rewards for failure to perform or for failure to participate is not punishment, it is merely a recognition that the required level of performance has not been achieved. Many are called, but few are chosen.

In my experience, employers establish specifications for products and services, which includes manpower, that they purchase so as to assist them in achieving their organisational goals. They will tend to decline offers of products and services that do not meet their standards, as doing otherwise would hamper their operational success. This is not punishment, it is merely sound operational management. If some employers decide that an advanced competence in English is a requirement for a specific position within their organisation, it is only natural that they view applicants meeting this requirement in a more positive light than those who do not. Awarding the coveted position to one candidate is a “reward” for their having met the criteria, it is NOT a “punishing” of the candidate who does not meet the requirement. To make such an argument is to suggest that an organisation requiring aluminium in its manufacturing process is “punishing” steel producers by not buying their product!

Your equating of the economic inducement to learn English with the imposition of learning Russian is, forgive me, simply beyond the pale.

EDITED:
Furiously typing away!